Latest update April 12th, 2025 7:02 AM
Aug 19, 2019 News
Almost six years ago, two-year-old Kamini Phillips was pronounced dead on arrival at the Georgetown Public Hospital Corporation (GPHC) where she was taken after complaining of chest pains before becoming unconscious. Government Pathologist Dr. Nehaul Singh gave her cause of death as haemorrhage and shock due to multiple abdominal injuries. Singh said that the child’s body had been subjected to anal penetration.
He said that the child also suffered abdominal trauma as a result of anal penetration as well as massive internal injuries. It was also his contention that the injuries were caused at the same time.
Additionally, Singh found that the toddler also suffered concussions to the head and neck which are consistent with a hit or fall. He noted that the child could have been pressed down, which restricted her breathing and the flow of blood in her chest cavity.
A few hours before her death, Phillips was left in the care of a then 15-year-old uncle who was later charged with her murder.
He was however acquitted of the crime in April 2016 after a jury found him not guilty of the murder which occurred on October 21, 2013 at Haslington, East Coast Demerara.
“Can there be any worse way for a two-year-old to die?” asked Child Rights activist Nicole Cole as she called out the police for what she deemed “extremely shoddy detective work.”
Cole was at the time speaking at a forum entitled ‘Interrogating Sexual Violence’ hosted by the University of Guyana. While there, she promised to continue advocating for justice for the little girl.
She expressed that given the nature of the injuries the toddler sustained she would have been in unimaginable pain. She added that it was impossible for an infant to live for more than a few minutes with such tremendous injuries. Cole went on to query, “Who killed Kamini?”
According to her, “about an hour prior to her death he (the accused relative) had been called and asked to gave her (Kamini) a bath and at that point she had been alive and well. The next time she was seen, she was dying or already dead. No one had any access to her. It was on the basis of this that the uncle was arrested.
Cole noted that there is no excusing of what can only be described as extremely shoddy detective work. She said that by the time a post mortem examination had been conducted on her, police already had an idea of how the little girl met her demise.
In this regard, Cole said that in keeping with proper protocol suspects should have been examined for signs of trauma consistent with the damage done to the victim.
She said, too, that samples should have also been taken from any suspects for DNA testing. According to her, there were no moves by the police to obtain DNA samples which could have been compared with the infant’s.
One variable would have ensured a conviction; the other would have seen the police widening their investigations. This is pretty basic detective work and there is no reason why it should not have been done.”
Cole said that an 18-year-old cousin who entrusted Phillips into the care of the uncle was called as a witness but gave conflicting evidence.
Against this backdrop, Cole stressed, “The police ought to have done its evidence gathering. The circumstantial evidence was solid.” Cole, therefore, hopes that the toddler’s case will be given another shot at justice with the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) mounting an appeal.
Apr 12, 2025
Kaieteur Sports- In a significant show of support for the next generation of Guyanese cricketers, FL Sport has provided a timely financial contribution to four members of the national Under-15 squad...Peeping Tom Kaieteur News- The People’s Progressive Party Civic has always believed in its own myth. It has fashioned... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News- Recent media stories have suggested that King Charles III could “invite” the United... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]